Let's not confuse "technical ability" with "ability to successfully operate a business that is Bitcoin-profitable" or even "ability to not realise you have many millions of Dollars worth of Bitcoin in a 150kb file and could disappear without a trace".

I like where this offering is going, but the 1 page "business strategy" is worthless. Given how reliant this company is on paying backend costs in fiat, they would need to present a great deal of business acumen coupled with a really solid and detailed strategy to demonstrate a glimmer of hope that investing in this will be more profitable than just holding your Bitcoin over the same period. Additionally, don't confuse the possibility of them being fiat profitable with them being Bitcoin profitable - the chance of the former may be very high indeed, but just like very nearly every mining operation that has ever existed, the chance of the latter is slim to none.

There's also minimal information as to who the operators are and whether they have a credible and long-standing WoT presence (far from infallible, but at least a step in the right direction). Why is this important? Well, for one thing, shutting down a business is trivial, abandoning it doubly so. Being an identifiable and amicable person means nothing (see: Neo&Bee). Having a registered business means nothing (see: AMC/VMC and many others). Trust is a product of provable engagements over time, coupled with an ongoing demonstration of business acumen by the operator(s) (which could be done, for example, by said operator(s) being involved in discussions of other businesses, and by providing advice and/or criticism they demonstrate that they at least have the knowledge to do better). Thus far there is little evidence of either of that here.

I'm certainly not calling this a scam, but I am saying that the counterparty risk is massive and disproportional, and there is little evidence that this will make you more Bitcoin than you invest (although it may very well end up being fiat profitable).